With DaaS Windows Coming, Say Goodbye To Your PC As You Know It

In article
"Mayayana" wrote:

"Jonathan N. Little" wrote

| Okay? Who told you that with Linux updates are somehow "forced" upon
| you?

No one. You're not listening because your shrill
reactiveness gets in the way. Someone said that
Linux is handy because one can have it handle
installs and updates with no fuss. I said I don't
want that. I want to manage things for myself and
I don't want it to be feasible for anything to go
online that I didn't instigate. Capiche? I never
said I thought Linux was spyware or that it
forces updates.

| Updates do fix *security* issues as well as bugs
| and add feature enhancements.

Yes. And I often install them when I think
it's appropriate. You allow all of your software
to call home and update itself, willy nilly? And you
assume those updates are improvements?

To my mind that's an unstable design and an
indefensible way to build software. The idea
is that it's not supposed to be beta when it's
released, so it doesn't have to be fixed on a regular
basis. I use a number of programs that are
rarely if ever updated. And I don't install Windows
patches until they've been time-tested, if at all.

I'm still using a lot of things that are 20 years old.
Paint Shop Pro 5. Visual Studio 6. Other things may
be 10 years old. Some things update more frequently,
but rarely with noticeable changes. Some things
arguably get worse with updates, like Firefox and
Internet Explorer.

But I expect your view is that of the majority.
The public has generally been trained to think
that if they turn off the dripfeed they'll be infested
with malware "before sundown". That's part of the
marketing of the service model.

In article
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote:

Mayayana wrote:
"William Unruh" wrote

| I have no problem with downloading but I
| don't want web installs. In other words, I want to
| manage the system and know what I'm changing.
| I don't want auto-updates, web installs, or anything
| that requires going online. The software is installed.
| Unless it's something like a browser there's no
| excuse for it going online.
|
| Again this paragraph makes no sense. You do not have all possible programs
and
| updates on you own computer. Ie, you have to get them from somewhere, and
| nowadays that somewhere is the net. I have not idea how you would get an
| update for say Word from anywhere but the net. Thus you have to go online
to
| install or update. Now you may not have meant what you said, but perhaps
you
| could say what you mean in that case.
|

I thought I explained it several times. Yes, I have
to go online to download updates, service packs, etc.
But I don't have to enable Windows Update or "web
installers". In other words, there's no reason I should
need to allow anything to call out. There's no reason
I should have to trust Microsoft, Google, or a Linux
"package manager" to communicate between my
machine and a remote location.
I run XP SP3 and Win7 SP1. Neither has ever had
Windows Update enabled. Neither has any networking
services running. Neither has anything running that
needs to, or is allowed to, go online -- aside from the
obvious things like browser, email, FTP, etc that go online
because I acted to make them do that.

What's so hard to understand? I want to manage the
system myself. I don't want to enable some unknown
quantity to make unilateral decisions that change the
system. I don't regard auto-updating as a reasonable
design idea and never enable it for any software.
There's a difference between me running Firefox
and allowing it to go out to port 80, as opposed to
having an unknown, non-transparent process going
out and communicating data that I'm not aware of
or in control of.

snip more nonsense

Okay? Who told you that with Linux updates are somehow "forced" upon
you? It is not Windows... You can install from a full DVD and uncheck
download updates during setup and then set Software & Updates to check
for update to *never*.

Updates do fix *security* issues as well as bugs and add feature
enhancements. If you don't want to update, not the wisest choice in my
opinion, but more power to you.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Chris wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 01/08/18 20:36, Chris wrote:
William Unruh wrote:
On 2018-08-01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

The problem is that the manufacturers/operators of nuclear power plants have proven
themselves incompetent at safety. Fukushima (lets put the emergency
power for water pumps in the basement). Chernobile (lets run tests and
override the emergeny failsafes). And the consequences of unsafe operation are
pretty devestating.

No one's going argue that Chernobyl wasn't a disaster. Fukushima was hit by
series of catastrophic events, one after the other, affecting multiple
backup systems and yet the reactor still didn't breach. The plant failed as
designed for the worst case scenario.

I can't imagine anything surviving a huge earthquake, subsequent tsunami
and failure of the cooling systems unscathed.

Let's not forget the tsunami killed 15,000 people. No-one has died as
result of the radiation leak from the fukushima accident.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...e-years-later/

https://xkcd.com/radiation/

So yes, your statement is OK, but it is a bit likethe
anti-greenouse crowd.

It's the opposite as it's based on fact .

There is nothing that a bunch of coal fired plants cannot do more cheaply than
any other source, until the consequences destroy civilisation. Unfortunately
consequences, including those of incompetence, because incompetence is a fixed
feature of the physica world, are things that need to be
taken into account in making decisions.

And yet despite even the Chernobyl disaster, nuclear has been shown to be
safer, cleaner and better overall than fossil fuel based power plants.

Fossil fuel is unsustainable, destroying the planet and killing people at
an ever increasing pace.

https://www.newscientist.com/article...nuclear-power/


If its in New Scientist, it's probably false.

Not sure where you're getting that from, but here's another source if you
prefer. There are others.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/91/web/...hs-Causes.html

3D printed guns save lives.

Ha ha ha! That's a good one. Have you got other gems?

In article
William Unruh wrote:

On 2018-08-02, Mayayana wrote:
"Dan Purgert" wrote

I have no problem with downloading but I
don't want web installs. In other words, I want to
manage the system and know what I'm changing.
I don't want auto-updates, web installs, or anything
that requires going online. The software is installed.
Unless it's something like a browser there's no
excuse for it going online.

Again this paragraph makes no sense. You do not have all possible programs and
updates on you own computer. Ie, you have to get them from somewhere, and
nowadays that somewhere is the net. I have not idea how you would get an
update for say Word from anywhere but the net. Thus you have to go online to
install or update. Now you may not have meant what you said, but perhaps you
could say what you mean in that case.

|
It gets complicated. Mostly I just mean that I want
to be free of data file restrictions. But the same restrictions

I have no idea what that means. Certainly in Linux if you created the data
file, then you will have full rights to it. Ie, no restrictions. If the system
created that data file, then there may or may not be restrictions, depending
on what the data file is. An often you can get access if you place yourself
into the appropriate group.

root, bin, daemon, admin, wheel, lp, are some of the key possible groups.

Welcome to Administrative Audit unit office
Address: 11th Floor Federal Secretariat,
Central Business District
FCT Abuja, Nigeria

Attention my dear Beneficiary

In the course of our investigation, your email address were
shortlisted among the first fifteen individuals yet to be paid their
overdue Re-compensation funds worth US$2,800,000.00.The Re-compensation
funds been successfully accredited in your favor through BANK SWIFT
CARD which you can withdraw in any ATM Machine World wide nearest to
you.

However, we received a Complained today from Mrs. Christina Morgan
that you are dead. According to her, you died in Road accidents as such
your Fund should be ship to her as the apparent heir. If we fail to
hear from you after 48 hours, it will be assumed that the complains of
Mrs.Morgan is true and the fund will be delivered to her without
further delay. Contact the Director of Audit to verify this from the
Administrative Audit unit.

And all the necessary documents of the delivery will hands over to her
immediately. If we fail to hear from you after 48 hours, and she also
wanted to paid the delivery fee of the ATM DEBITS CARD right now but we
told her that we will investigation the matters weather true or lie.


To avoid undue delay or delivery the fund to wrong individual, we have
decided to contact you for confirmation.Your
personal information is also required immediately as below which will
be needed for confirmations before we transfer the funds to her.

(A) Full name.........
(B) country...........
(C) Residential address.......
(D) Active Telephone numbers......
(E) YOUR ID........
(F) Ocupation..........

we are waiting to hear from you soon, if you are still alive.

best Regards:
Barr. Alberto Lancioli

Director audit unit
EMail:
EMail:

In article
William Unruh wrote:

On 2018-08-03, Mayayana wrote:
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote

| Okay? Who told you that with Linux updates are somehow "forced" upon
| you?

No one. You're not listening because your shrill
reactiveness gets in the way. Someone said that
Linux is handy because one can have it handle
installs and updates with no fuss. I said I don't

You are not listening because your shrill reactiveness gets in the way

Linux is handy because one can have it handle
installs and updates with no fuss. I said I don't

That is up to you. You can do what you want. Why is that
such a difficult concept for you to grasp.

want that. I want to manage things for myself and
I don't want it to be feasible for anything to go
online that I didn't instigate. Capiche? I never
said I thought Linux was spyware or that it
forces updates.

| Updates do fix *security* issues as well as bugs
| and add feature enhancements.

Yes. And I often install them when I think
it's appropriate. You allow all of your software
to call home and update itself, willy nilly? And you
assume those updates are improvements?

He never said that. You are erecting straw men and then furiously
attacking them.



To my mind that's an unstable design and an
indefensible way to build software. The idea
is that it's not supposed to be beta when it's
released, so it doesn't have to be fixed on a regular

That may be true, but it is almost impossible to actually
impliment. There are simply too many corner cases to all have been
tested.

Welcome to Administrative Audit unit office
Address: 11th Floor Federal Secretariat,
Central Business District
FCT Abuja, Nigeria

Attention my dear Beneficiary

In the course of our investigation, your email address were
shortlisted among the first fifteen individuals yet to be paid their
overdue Re-compensation funds worth US$2,800,000.00.The Re-compensation
funds been successfully accredited in your favor through BANK SWIFT
CARD which you can withdraw in any ATM Machine World wide nearest to
you.

However, we received a Complained today from Mrs. Christina Morgan
that you are dead. According to her, you died in Road accidents as such
your Fund should be ship to her as the apparent heir. If we fail to
hear from you after 48 hours, it will be assumed that the complains of
Mrs.Morgan is true and the fund will be delivered to her without
further delay. Contact the Director of Audit to verify this from the
Administrative Audit unit.

And all the necessary documents of the delivery will hands over to her
immediately. If we fail to hear from you after 48 hours, and she also
wanted to paid the delivery fee of the ATM DEBITS CARD right now but we
told her that we will investigation the matters weather true or lie.


To avoid undue delay or delivery the fund to wrong individual, we have
decided to contact you for confirmation.Your
personal information is also required immediately as below which will
be needed for confirmations before we transfer the funds to her.

(A) Full name.........
(B) country...........
(C) Residential address.......
(D) Active Telephone numbers......
(E) YOUR ID........
(F) Ocupation..........

we are waiting to hear from you soon, if you are still alive.

best Regards:
Barr. Alberto Lancioli

Director audit unit
EMail:
EMail:

"Mayayana" writes:
So Linux isn't popular because people are dumb?
Over the past decade or so I've seen a lot of people
move to Macs. They're expensive, restricted and limited,
but they have one thing that Windows doesn't: stability
provided by control of the hardware. Macs are also
designed to do whatever Lord Jobs thought you should
want to do, without providing other options.

They are general purpose computers, you can run anything you like on
them.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

In article
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote:

mike wrote:
My issue with that is that it's not always a complete installation.
The gui says it's installed. OK, where the hell is it? How to I
envoke it. Why isn't there an icon on the desktop, or in the start
menu-adjacent list? Well, depends on the program and the distro
and...and. You shouldn't have to remember and type in a command
line to bring up a GUI configuration tool.

That is pure BS. If you install an application from the distro's
respective software repository it will setup the respective shortcuts
for the desktop environment. That's true for all the main DEs, GNOME,
Unity, KDE, LXDE, Xfce...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Mayayana wrote:
"Caver1" wrote

| You are stuck in a rut. Don't want to learn anything new....
| As a software engineer not using the
| commandline is very limiting.
|
And I'm the one stuck in a rut? I write software.
I don't use command line. Maybe writing software *on
Linux* needs command line.

Nah, you can use an IDE, such as VS: Code or Eclipse or whatever.


--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Mayayana wrote:
"mike" wrote

| Gambas was to enable my transition to linux.
| I'd hoped to convert my VB6 programs to Gambas.
| Learning C was out of the question.
| What I found was a lot of, "this feature not yet implemented."
| Over the years it didn't get much better. Not enough
| of what I needed.

I explored a similar option with WINE. It was
interesting how much worked in WINE. But the winos
were not willing to share anything like an API list.
They wanted me to register as a bug hunter for
my software and herd the bug until it was resolved.
I was surprised and taken aback by the paramilitary
pecking order of the whole thing. All the more so
because I was assigned to be a lowest-level lackey.
So the upshot was that there was no way for me
to write to WINE and thus no reason to deal with it
at all.

Because one does not write *for WINE*. It is a compatibility layer
between Windows-only programs (e.g. those games you seem to dislike
strongly), and Linux-based computers.

Essentially, it provides the Microsoft ABIs that these programs need to
run - although not perfectly; and not all of them.



| I remember the days when you could just type a command.
| In this week's linux install/configure attempts,
| the majority of my keystrokes have been "sudo" and typing
| my password, only to find that the command no longer exists
| in this version of that distro with the other desktop.

That's the other glaring problem with Linux. Win98 is
still a viable OS if one wants to write to it. Most software
still works on XP. Yet when I tried Suse I think the support
cycle was either 12 or 18 months. Constant churn of
updated libraries and kernel.

Haven't ever used them (Suse), but most distributions have several release
cycles:

- "LTS" - a 5 year plan that more or less is on par with Microsoft and
Apple. For example, WinXP was 2001, WinVista was 2006, Win7 was '09
(although, IIRC, that was because Vista was so hated), and so on.

- "non LTS" - anywhere from 6 to 18 month release cycle. Essentially
"beta" releases for the next LTS release. In my case, relegated to
test VMs.

- "Rolling Release" - you install whatever version, and it continually
gets full updates every howevermany months. I personally don't like
these types of distro.

As for the "churn" of updated libraries (etc.) - Microsoft does the same
thing with Windows Updates. The real big difference is that if a
non-Microsoft program wants to update, it whines at you when you start
ie (or has a taskbar thing that whines about an update -- e.g. Java);
whereas Linux distros tend to use the same update manager for
everything.

--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

In article
Dan Purgert wrote:

Mayayana wrote:
"Caver1" wrote

| You are stuck in a rut. Don't want to learn anything new....
| As a software engineer not using the
| commandline is very limiting.
|
And I'm the one stuck in a rut? I write software.
I don't use command line. Maybe writing software *on
Linux* needs command line.

Nah, you can use an IDE, such as VS: Code or Eclipse or whatever.


--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

In article
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote:

Mayayana wrote:
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote

| mike wrote:
| My issue with that is that it's not always a complete installation.
| The gui says it's installed. OK, where the hell is it? How to I
| envoke it. Why isn't there an icon on the desktop, or in the start
| menu-adjacent list? Well, depends on the program and the distro
| and...and. You shouldn't have to remember and type in a command
| line to bring up a GUI configuration tool.
|
| That is pure BS.

You're very good at insulting people. Do you really
think he's making that up just to annoy you?

Just calling it what it is. Me specifically? No, but awfully tired of
"Linux issues" that are just patently false. Just as false as when Linux
users say you can delete C:\Windows while running Windows and trash your
system.

This is an example of another big Linux problem: Identifying with the
product. A misplaced, emotional sense of loyalty. You think he's
making up criticism. You think I'm a "Windows fanboy". You feel under
attack because you identify with Linux. That's your trip. It's not
ours. We just want to use computers. It's not a religious issue for
us.
I use both. Not religious either, just maters if what is stated it true
or not.


What you don't get is that Windows doesn't engender
the kind of vehement loyalty that happens with Macs
and Linux.

Whoa! No Windows trolls in Linux NG?

Windows is the Ford Taurus of cars. Mac is
a sports car -- pretty but limited. Linux is a custom
build.

Can be, depends on the distro. Some are pre-canned to run OOTB like
Ubuntu, Mint, and many others. And others are more niche specific,
Scientific Linux comes to mind. Others more like kits such as Slack and
LFS Linux From Scratch

But Windows is just a Taurus. People don't start
Ford Taurus fan clubs. No one's trying to beat your team.
We don't have a team.

Or more like Henry's vision of the Model T where you can get it in any
color also long as it is black.


--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Mayayana wrote:
"William Unruh" wrote

| I have no problem with downloading but I
| don't want web installs. In other words, I want to
| manage the system and know what I'm changing.
| I don't want auto-updates, web installs, or anything
| that requires going online. The software is installed.
| Unless it's something like a browser there's no
| excuse for it going online.
Again this paragraph makes no sense. You do not have all possible
programs and updates on you own computer. Ie, you have to get them
from somewhere, and nowadays that somewhere is the net. I have not
idea how you would get an update for say Word from anywhere but the
net. Thus you have to go online to install or update. Now you may not
have meant what you said, but perhaps you could say what you mean in
that case.

I thought I explained it several times. Yes, I have
to go online to download updates, service packs, etc.
But I don't have to enable Windows Update or "web
installers". In other words, there's no reason I should
need to allow anything to call out. There's no reason
I should have to trust Microsoft, Google, or a Linux
"package manager" to communicate between my
machine and a remote location.

Then don't. Install everything manually from *deb (for Debian or
Debian-derived distributions, such as Ubuntu, Mint, MX_Linux, etc.) or
*rpm (RedHat or RedHat-derived distributions, such as Fedora, etc.).

The package manager is merely the equivalent of "the app store" on
iOS/Android/Win10 (Dunno if Mac has one of those).

I run XP SP3 and Win7 SP1. Neither has ever had
Windows Update enabled. Neither has any networking
services running. Neither has anything running that
needs to, or is allowed to, go online -- aside from the
obvious things like browser, email, FTP, etc that go online
because I acted to make them do that.

That's kind of unsafe, what with the machines being connected to the
internet. I mean, all it takes is one website having something
malicious that can exploit your unpatched boxes.

Unless you mean that you download the KBxxxx patch files direct from MS,
rather than using Windows Update to grab / install them automatically?

[...]
There's a difference between me running Firefox
and allowing it to go out to port 80, as opposed to
having an unknown, non-transparent process going
out and communicating data that I'm not aware of
or in control of.

If you're really that concerned about the updaters, the source code is
available for aptitude (and derivatives) for Debian-based systems, as
well as whatever redhat uses (yum?).

Or, like with Windows, you can just turn off the update manager, and do
everything by hand.

High level way aptitude (etc.) work is as follows:

1. Download package metadata lists (headers) from the internet (nothing
is sent out).
2. Use those new lists to update the "current version" information in
your local package listing database.
3. Compare the "current version" to the "installed version" in said
local database
4. Tell the user which package(s) have new versions. Stop and wait
here for the user to confirm install (note, admin priveleges
required to actually run installs).
5. If updates are wanted, user (admin) confirms and the tool downloads
the packages via http, checks package gpg signatures, then installs.

NOTE that aptitude and friends ONLY run when you want. Most distros
also include an "update manager", which is pretty easy to keep from
starting up (varies slightly with the distro, as it's usually a
distro-specific program. Probably a bit stupid to not just have it come
from the main upstream -- Debian or RedHat -- but they also seem to
focus more on the "server" market; and well, auto-updates are horribly
bad there )


If your only experience on computers is using a
networked computer then I suppose it may be hard
to understand the idea of a fully stand-alone system.

Nah, makes perfect sense if that's what you want. But you've not
described fully stand-alone systems. Ones I use are air-gapped from the
rest of the world, and if you need to transfer something off, it's "burn
it to optical media". (right pain that... I mean, I need to move 200KiB
off, and need to waste a 700 MB CD -- I really miss those mini-CDs we
used to get).

People working for companies on an intranet are
generally lackey users who only have control over
their own personal folder. In that scenario, the network
is trusted while the user is not.
But for a SOHo user the reverse is true: There's little
reason for networking functionality and lots of security
reasons to disable it. The user is trusted while the
network is not.

I trust my (home) network more than I trust the users of it. Including
myself. Stupid meatbag humans

Honestly, in home networks, I would say that the users and network
itself are equally untrustworthy. But that being said, it does make for
convenience (and, let's be honest here - people tend to want that above
all else).

On Windows 10 that's even more relevant because
the things calling home are spyware and an auto-update
system that is using SOHo customers as unpaid beta
testers for new changes, which corporate customers
are then allowed to put off until the kinks have been
worked out. Can you see that there's a fundamental
difference between me downloading and installing Windows
patch XYZ vs Microsoft coming onto my system and
installing it without asking?

And that's a difference with Linux distributions -- when they update,
they tend to be somewhat "behind" the software devs. For example,
openssh is currently version 7.7, but my "daily driver" system
(MX_Linux, release 17) is only running 7.4p1.


This is not a complex concept. Another example:
Can you see how there's a fundamental difference
between you inviting someone into your home vs
that person coming in uninvited, without your
knowledge? It's no difference with a computer. It's
your desk and file cabinets. It's your personal
property. I would have thought that was common
sense.





--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

"William Unruh" wrote

|
| AGain, you overstate yourself and then have to backtrack. If you canuse a
| browser then you are connected to the net and have networking services
| running.
|

I meant Windows networking services. There are
various services (daemons?) on Windows that are enabled
by default because the default configuration is for
corporate workstations. I disable anything that might
need to go online through the services "shepherd",
svchost.exe. I then can block svchost at the firewall.

If I use a browser then, yes, I'm going online. I think
we agree there.

|
| What's so hard to understand? I want to manage the
| system myself. I don't want to enable some unknown
| quantity to make unilateral decisions that change the
|
| That is fine. On Mageia the update tells you that there are updates
available,
| but it is up to you to actually initiate them.
|

And how did the updater figure that out? Did it
call online? That's what I don't want. This is not a
Linux issue. It's a privacy/security preference. If
you give someone a key to your house then you
have to trust that that person is honest and
competent.
This is just my personal preference. It has
nothing to do with Linux. I only brought it up
in the context of saying that I don't consider
Linux "for dummies" features to be an improvement.
But I think I've explained that a few times now.
I'm not going to keep arguing the same point.

On 03/08/18 12:44, Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/08/18 11:02, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2018-08-01 09:04, Chris wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Anssi Saari
wrote:


MS underestimated Android in the phone market.
They might fail again with the desktop.

Here's hoping (for Microsoft's demise). But I think it's more like a
paradigm shift happened. Absolutely nothing threatens Microsoft on the
PC desktop,

quite a bit does. chromebooks are very strong in education and web apps
(mainly google) are winning out over ms office.

Not in the UK. Schools and universities are wall to wall MS. Which is
particularly depressing given the lack of money in schools.

I was in a classroom a few years back here (Spain), and the funny thing
was that the school officially embraced free software; yet the teachers
wrote their pieces on Word instead of LibreOffice, so the students did
the same (without licenses). Someone really using LO had a bit of a
problem because the formatting often is not accurately converted.

I have found thats generally NOT an issue if the same fonts are installed


Most of the people I saw used Windows and Office without licenses, so MS
was getting nothing - except that the people got familiar with MS and
demand MS products later.


Mmm.

But companies are just rubbish really. I mean would you believe a
company that prints from WORD onto letterhead PAPER, scans the result
and emails it as a PDF?

Yes because some people aren't swift enough to construct a
document template, or "It's always been done that way here".

Scan the letterhead first, make a template, then type on it Luke.

Wh uyou calling luke?

Of course that is what they should do. Do they wabt to listen?


--
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that
the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."

- Bertrand Russell